Islam, Peace and Jihad:The basic law underlying inter-community relations in Islam is peace and reconciliation (sulh).
Ideally, the relations that a Muslim state should enjoy with other
states in the world should be based on....Read
Full

'I see my role as offering the voices of the silenced majority of
Muslims in America and around the world', says
Obama's Muslim advisor: Dalia Mogahed, a hijab-clad American Muslim,
has made history.... Read
Full

Zafar Shaikh-Making Possible The Impossible:While working with Zafar Shaikh at
Star Bottling Company in Jalgaon nineteen years ago, the fellow
co-workers had never imagined that he would one day become the sole... Read
Full

The
Men Inspired by Debacles:If one intends to learn
“how to invite a trouble and come out of it triumphant”, then one
must meet Ashwin Shah aka Lalit Shah of an empire popularly known as
Oasis.....Read Full

Skilled Hands converting couplets
into portraits:
The powerloom factories might have been the only available option
for the Malegaonians, the deprived people of the....Read
Full

‘National history has been
fragmented too callously’:
The sad thing is that the standard structure, particularly in
history, has declined considerably. This is partly because of the
poor quality of....Read
Full

Fascism
and Terrorism:
Two Sides of the same coin: “It seems that the fascist forces with a
clear anti-Muslim agenda have infiltrated the security forces. Since
the Indian constitution is .... Read Full

Check the Foreign Investments:
Foreign Fund has always lured the third world countries. However
with the beginning of the 21st century the lust in India
reached such a level that to attract the....Read
Full

Taliban Ban on Female Education-Against Islamic principles is their act, not
the female education, they assert: Taking strong
exceptions of the reports that are appearing in the....Read
Full

Saudi King calls for Interfaith Dialogue: The Saudi king has made an
impassioned plea for dialogue among Muslims, Christians and Jews — the
first such proposal from a nation with no diplomatic ties to Israel
and a ban on non-Muslim religious services and...Read Full

From the 1800s to the present day, family life in the West has
remarkably changed. While the West calls this change part of the
women freedom movement, a look at history may show otherwise.

America before the 1800s was a farming country and ninety percent of
the population lived and worked on private farms. Households were
mainly self-sufficient--nearly everything needed was produced in the
house. The few things that could not be produced at home were bought
from local craftsmen. Some other things, especially imports from
Europe, were bought from stores. Males would take care of the fields
and females would take care of the home. In addition, they would
engage in spinning, knitting, weaving, and taking care of the farm
animals.

Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution, which began around the early 1800s,
brought a major change to this way of life. In 1807, in the wake of
the war between Great Britain and France, President Jefferson signed
the Embargo Act, which stopped all trade between Europe and America.
The Act meant that European goods would no longer be available in
the US and Americans would have to produce them. One major European
import to America was cloth, and so merchants used this opportunity
to create a cloth industry in America.

In 1814, Francis Cabot Lowell, a man from Boston opened the first
modern factory. Work here was to be done way faster than before.
Instead of manually making things in houses, things were to be made
at higher speeds in a factory and all stages of the work were to be
completed under the same roof. Now what Lowell needed were workers.
He found out that women, especially unmarried daughters of the
farmers, were more economical to use in labor than men. They were
also more willing to work as hired people in factories.

But Lowell had to make the working outside of home acceptable in a
society which was not used to it. He assured parents that their
daughters would be taken care of and kept under discipline. And he
built a boarding community where the women workers lived and worked
together.

Soon after, more and more factories emerged across America. Factory
owners followed Lowell's example of hiring unmarried women. By 1850
most of the country's goods were made in factories. As production of
goods moved from the country to the city, people too moved from the
country to the city.

For money to be earned, people had to leave their homes. When women
worked on the farm, it was always possible to combine work and
family. When work for women moved outside the home, however, the
only women who could follow it were those without family
responsibilities or those who had no husband or no income. Likewise,
the only women who could take care of their families were the ones
that didn't have work.

This working out of home became a part of life for unmarried women.
They would work until their marriage. But as time passed, women
found family life interfering with their work life and instead of
viewing working out of home as optional, they viewed family life as
such. Many women started delaying marriage even more and some
decided to stay single.

Married women however stayed home and dedicated their time to their
children. Now that there wasn't any farm work to do, women had even
more time to spend with the children. In 1900 less than about 5.6%
of married women worked outside. If a married woman were to work, it
would be considered that her husband was invalid or that she was
poor.

World War I

The first major entry of married women to the workforce came during
World War I in 1914. Men went to fight the war and the country
needed workers to take over the jobs they left behind. Unmarried
women were not sufficient for the labor needs, so employers started
to invite married women too, to work. By 1919, 25% of the women in
the workforce were married. But this was only the beginning.

Another change World War I brought was the entry of women to the
army. About 13,000 women enlisted in the US Navy, mostly doing
clerical work--the first women in US history to be admitted to full
military rank.

Great Depression

The Great Depression came in the 1930s. The unemployment rate
climbed from 3.2% in 1929 to 23.6% in 1932. Jobs became scarce for
skilled people and men. Fathers went to search for jobs. Some, under
despair, deserted their families. The responsibility of earning fell
on mothers in many families.

Most women and children, however, found jobs more easily than men
because of the segregation of work categories for men and women.
Although 80% of men during the Great Depression opposed their wives
entering the workforce under any circumstances, economic factors
made it necessary for the women to work. Hours were long and pay was
low. Twenty percent of white women were in the workforce.

World War II

World War II came in the early 1940s. Men were drafted to fight, and
America needed workers and supplies. Again, the employers looked
towards the women for labor. Unmarried and married women were
invited to work, as had been done during World War I.

But still, public opinion was generally against the working of
married women. The media and the government started a fierce
propaganda campaign to change this opinion. The federal government
told the women that victory could not be achieved without their
entry into the workforce. Working was considered part of being a
good citizen, a working wife was a patriotic person.

The government founded the Magazine Bureau in 1942. The Bureau
published Magazine War Guide, a guide which told magazines which
themes stories they should cover each month to aid war propaganda.
For September 1943, the theme was "Women at Work". The slogan for
this was "The More Women at Work the Sooner We Win." Magazines
developed stories that glorified and promoted the placement of women
into untraditional jobs where workers were needed. The idea was that
if smaller, unexciting jobs were portrayed as attractive and noble
more women would join the work force.

The media created Rosie the Riveter, a mythical character to
encourage women into the workforce. Rosie was portrayed as a
patriotic woman, a hero for all American women. "All the day long,
Whether rain or shine, She's a part of the assembly line. She's
making history, Working for victory, Rosie the Riveter… There's
something true about, Red, white, and blue about, Rosie the
Riveter."

The propaganda efforts worked. More than six million women joined
the workforce during the war, the majority of them married women. In
1940, before the war, only 36% of women workers were married. By
1945, after the war, 50% of women workers were married. The middle
class taboo against a working wife had been repealed.

Post World War II

The 1950s marked an era of prosperity in the lives of American
families. Men returned from war and needed jobs. Once again, the
government and media got together to steer the opinion of the
public. This time, however, they encouraged women to return home,
which shows that the women were brought out not for their freedom
but because workers were needed.

But this effort was not as successful and was abandoned quickly.
First, women from lower economic ranks had to remain in the
workforce because of economic necessity. And second, there came the
rise of consumer culture.

The baby boom took place during the 1950s as well. Women who
returned home dedicated their lives once again to their children.
But around the same time an important change had come in the
American life. This was the spread of the television. By 1960, 90%
of the population owned at least one set. Families would gather
around the screen for entertainment. In the early days, everything
including commercials was watched with great interest.

Most middle-class families could not afford the goods the television
declared necessary to maintain or enhance quality of life with one
paycheck alone. Many women returned to work in order to live
according to "the American standard of living," whatever that meant
to them.

The number of American women in the workforce from 1940 to 1950
increased by nine percent. From 1930 to 1940 there had only been a
three percent increase.

Effects

As mothers returned to work, the television became the most
important caretaker of a child. Children in the 1950s spent most of
their non-sleeping hours in front of the television screen.

In 1940, less than 8.6% of mothers with children under eighteen
worked. By 1987, 60.2% of women with children under eighteen were
working.

As wives assumed larger roles in their family's financial support,
they felt justified in demanding that husbands perform more
childcare and housework. Across the years, divorce rates doubled
reaching a level where at least 1 out of 2 marriages was expected to
end in divorce. Marriage rates and birthrates declined. The number
of single parent families rapidly increased. People grew unhappy
with their lives, when compared to the lives of people on
television.

Women working affected the society in many different ways. The first
and most important of these was that children with working mothers
were left alone without the care of a mother. As the number of
working women increased, the number of children growing up
unsupervised increased, and with this increased crime among teens.

Since most women placed their career ahead of family life, family
life was greatly affected since unmarried women were generally able
to make more money than married ones. For example, according to a
study by a Harvard economist, women physicians who were unmarried
and had no children earned thirteen percent more per year than those
who were married and fifteen percent more than those with children.

Today

The majority of women still work at the lower levels of the economic
pyramid. Most are employed in clerical positions, factory work,
retail sales, or service jobs. Around 50% of the workforce is
female. While about 78% of all cashiers and 99% of all secretaries
today are female, only 31% of managers and administrators are
female. Equality in the workplace has been a mirage but it has
conned millions of women into leaving their homes and destroying the
family structure.

It was only when economic or political factors made it necessary to
get more workers that women were called to work. The Industrial
Revolution, the Great Depression, and the World Wars, all the major
events which increased the proportion of women workers, were times
when the capitalists required more workers in order to be successful
in their plans and so they used women.

The move of women from home to the public workforce has been
gradual. First poor women went. Then unmarried women. Then married
women without children. Then married women without young children.
And then, all women. The same thing can be seen to be happening in
developing countries around the world, as the West spreads its
propaganda of freedom for women to work. The results of this move
will probably be the same too.

The article by Areeba bint Khalid is
perhaps a good analysis of how a class of working women developed
gradually and in majority of the cases almost unnecessarily...

However there is one very important point
as to why women must be prepared to be financially independent... the
atrocities on women!

the reason for divorce is not always
because women go out to work, most of the times it is the behaviour of
the husband and his family that force a woman to either be financially
dependent on the man and suffer humiliations or uphold her self respect
and go in for separation.

I've seen enough practical examples to
believe very strongly that working wives and mothers are NOT always the
reason for divorces or failed marriages. It is time the institution of
marriage underwent some humanitarian changes as well, so that the family
life can be sustained.

Please bear with me and allow me to share
my views on marriage and family system:

I think one takes certain things for
granted: One's family for instance. While assuming it to be an integral
part of life we often neglect the importance of having a family that
helps us take on life's challenges relatively easily. Because the family
is made up of our own people whose concern for our pain is genuine and
therefore can soothe an anguished soul as nothing else can. A supportive
family is that cushion which helps us absorb the shocks and overcome
fears, providing fortitude and confidence in the most trying times.

And if the family can be taken for granted,
is it any wonder that marriage, which sustains the family is under
tremendous pressure. In addition we hear of same sex marriages and
live-in relationships as an acceptable alternative to the hitherto
satisfactory traditions of social behaviour. An ever-increasing number
of the educated youth have started questioning marriage and are
contemplating if marriage has outlived its usefulness.That the youth
should think so, and become cynical to this extent in their personal
lives is indeed indicative of how much the tolerance levels have drooped
these days.

The unwritten law in a normal Indian
marriage is that the woman must follow the customs of her husband's
family. She is supposed to take his name and in some places even her
first name is changed as part of the marriage rituals. Thus every trace
of her maiden identity is lost forever. Is it correct for a marriage to
be so extremely one-sided where it becomes the holy duty of the woman to
make all adjustments?

The late Begum Tara Shervani, who shared
excellent relations with her daughters-in-law, once said to me that the
tussle in a marriage is no less a fight for power than in high political
circles with the two most polarised positions being taken by the mother
and the wife of the man. Each one feels insecure of the other! The fact
however is that both the wife and the mother have their unique places
and thus both are important in their own way. She could not have been
more judicious.

The present day increase in divorce rates
indicates how fragile marriages (where the partners are called
jeevan-saathi!) have become. Any relationship needs time and space to
mature. The same is true about marriage. So much depends on it. And yet
since life is not an experiment carried out in a science lab or a
theorem proved after research in mathematics, there is no one formula to
ensure success in a marriage. Life is beautiful because it is forever
changing, and hence individual situations demand individual solutions,
which in turn demand a level-headed approach, which in turn demands
maturity. The success of a marriage may thus be assumed to lie in
patience.

Let us realise that there are no perfect
situations in life. After all perfection is one of the virtues of God
Almighty, while we mortals have been granted the luxury of being always
imperfect. So it is perfectly in accordance with Nature that marriages
are imperfect. And it helps to remember that marriage is neither an
unending tug-of-war where the parties are constantly pulling on the rope
to outdo each other, nor is it an auction where the highest bidder
vrooms with the groom.

Certainly there are no such situations in
real life where one can end with "...and they lived happily ever after."
In the continuity called life you just go on from one situation to
another, learning and sometimes unlearning things. And although in a
society, there is a proper time and place for things to happen, one
should have the liberty to decide upon this most important aspect in
one's life, where ideally the decision-making should rest on
considerations such as love, compatibility and understanding.

But until this can be achieved, families
will continue to crumble as they strive for existence...and marriage
will continue to be a beautiful word with an ugly meaning...

All people have a
deep-rooted, natural desire for freedom and self-dtermination, both
collectively and as individuals. This "all people," dear Faizee Aleem
ji, believe it or not, includes the female gender. It is not right to
expect me, a woman, to be happy always at the mercy of some man. He
might be a very good, kind, loving, generous man, as was my first
husband. Even so, forced dependency is bitter to a free soul. Although
I had the ability to go out and earn money, I chose to stay home and
raise our child - while also running our home and farm. Still, if I
did not have my own resources, it would still be slavery, me at the
mercy of his whim. I loved my life because it was my own choice. If I
had been forced to live that way, I would have been frustrated and
miserable. However luxurious and pleasant, slavery is still slavery.
Frankly, I would rather live in a shack scraping by and be free, than to
live in a mansion as a slave, even if the mistress of the house.

A dry chapatti with a
glass of water eaten in the freedom of self-determination is sweeter
than a sumptious feast eaten in submission to another human being.
Slavery is ashes in the mouth.

Of course, I am a
Sikh, not a Muslim; I wouldn't dream of telling you how to follow your
own religion. You must obey its teachings, as you understand them. May
the One God (by whatever name) bless you in your endeavor. Just,
please, don't try to force it down my throat.

BTW, I have never
liked most Women's Liberationists. They tend to be bitter and glum and
full of malice toward men. On the whole, I like men, enjoy their
company - in a chaste way, of course. Also the Women's Libbers tend to
have no sense of humour and less sense of fun. "If there's no dancing,
I don't want your revolution." Emma Goldman.

Ummid.com is part of Awaz
Multimedia & Publications providing World News, News Analysis and Feature
Articles on Education, Health. Politics, Technology,
Sports, Entertainment, Industry etc.
The articles or the views displayed on this website are for public
information and in no way describe the editorial views. The users are
entitled to use this site subject to the terms and condition mentioned.